[Vision2020] IPCC Skeptics, A Skeptical Retort From the IPCC, Skeptics Fire Back

Ted Moffett starbliss at gmail.com
Wed Sep 12 01:13:30 PDT 2007


Does the dire threat of radical climate change deserve an immediate response
to radically alter the way we live, i. e. dramatically lower fossil fuel CO2
emitting use?  Though the scientific consensus appears solid, debate
continues among scientists, with apparent credibility, about the reliability
of some of the predictions of the IPCC.  So this is not a local issue?
Given that local (Moscow/Pullman) car and light truck use dumps tens of
thousands of tons (no joke!) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year, and the
connections in the local economy to the transport of goods produced and
shipped from elsewhere (China!) via fossil fueled means, our response to
these facts is either responsible or irresponsible, based on the reliability
of the IPCC predictions.  A pro-growth Moscow that does not seek to reduce
fossil fuel CO2 emissions is irresponsible in the extreme, if the
IPCC findings are basically correct.  We would be selling out the future of
the planet, with long term local negative impacts, for short term gain.

IPCC skeptics in Nature Magazine:


IPCC scientists respond and the skeptics respond again:


Ted Moffett <http://www.iac.ethz.ch/people/knuttir/papers/schwartz07nat.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070912/617e6037/attachment.html 

More information about the Vision2020 mailing list